LAUSR

Marsh and Rajaram’s (2019) thought-provoking analysis of he various implications of internet usage for memory and cogition will undoubtedly serve as a timely stepping-stone for dvancing the area of research. The mingling of mind and achine is still in an incipient stage of development, and it is preisely for this reason that research on the topic is so important. he internet is affecting the way we think and remember, and s psychological scientists it is imperative that we are forward hinking in our efforts to study and understand these effects, ocusing not only on the consequences of how we use the interet today but how we are likely to use it in the future. In the urrent commentary, I discuss the importance of thinking about hat it means to remember and forget in a system that encomasses both internal and external memory, and I outline a few dditional potential limitations that I think will be important o consider when thinking about how the internet is affecting emory. Marsh and Rajaram (2019) repeatedly refer to the blurring f the line between what we know and what we can access nline. Certainly, internal and external memories differ in many mportant ways, but both ultimately reflect information that nforms behavior. Externally represented information can affect udgments and decisions, determine whether and how people eek out additional information, and influence how people think bout themselves and others (Fisher, Goddu, & Keil, 2015; ertel, 1993; Hamilton, McIntyre, & Hertel, 2016; Ward, 2013). n the everyday use of memory, therefore, as online informaion becomes increasingly available and easy to access, and s more of what we know involves a confluence of informaion stored internally and externally, perhaps the line between hat is in the head versus not in the head becomes a little ess consequential. Indeed, it may be useful to reconsider how